9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 1244X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant is at liberty to raise the issue before the adjudicating authority by producing the documentary evidence - matter remitted for quantification of CENVAT credit on the basis of the documents produced by the appellant - appeal allowed by way of remand. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edit of labour charges, courier charges and testing charges, filed a refund application on 29.12.2011 with the Assistant Commissioner but the said application was returned on 6.1.2012 mentioning that the issue involved audit point raised by the Central Excise and hence the refund claim had to be filed with Central Excise authorities. Thereafter the appellant approached the Central Excise authorities and the appellant was advised that no refund claim can be granted for the said amount as it is an audit point and suggested the appellant that he should seek permission to avail the CENVAT credit reversed on 31.1.2011 based on audit findings. Thereafter, the appellant submitted a request to the Assistant Commissioner for availing the reversed CE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... charges are concerned, the learned counsel for the appellant did not press for this. Further, with regard to the testing charges, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that appellant being a manufacturing-company, there is always a requirement for testing to be conducted in-house as well as outside the factory premises and the service provider was paid service tax on the testing charges which was taken as CENVAT credit by the appellant. In support of his submission, he relied upon the decisions rendered in the case of Flex Engineering Ltd. vs. CCE: 2012 (276) ELT 153 (SC) and Rane Nastech Ltd. vs. CCE, Chennai: 2010 (262) ELT 904. Learned counsel further submitted that the appellant is also entitled to take the CENVAT credit of se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
